Judge upholds $604 million verdict against C.H. Robinson, putting broker control clauses in focus

A Dallas County judge on Friday, Oct. 16, affirmed a July jury verdict of $604,025,000 against C.H. Robinson over a fatal 2021 truck crash, FreightWaves reported. The ruling is the first step after the jury verdict.

What happened

The March 2021 crash in Jackson, Mississippi, killed three people. The driver worked for Lupus Superior, a carrier C.H. Robinson hired to haul a load for Arizona Beverages. FreightWaves reports that about $107 million in pre-judgment interest at 6.75% pushes the total past $700 million, citing TD Cowen analyst Jason Seidl.

The case centers on control. Per FreightWaves, the judge's ruling rests on a finding that the driver was subject to control by the broker "as to the details of the mission." That is a different theory from the one most brokers have worried about since the Supreme Court's May decision in *Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II*, which let negligent-selection claims against brokers proceed. Husch Blackwell, a law firm, wrote on Sept. 16 that the jury rejected a negligent-selection theory here and instead found the driver was the broker's "borrowed employee." The firm pointed to contract terms such as GPS tracking and mandatory check-ins as evidence of control.

C.H. Robinson's chief legal officer, Dorothy Capers, said the company did not cause or contribute to the accident, and noted that Lupus Superior held a Satisfactory FMCSA rating and had delivered nearly 270 loads for the broker without incident. She called for a national safety standard for carriers instead of rules set after the fact, state by state. Seidl told FreightWaves he assumes an appeal, with the vicarious liability finding the likeliest target.

What it means for brokers and shippers

Tracking, check-in calls and detailed delivery instructions are standard practice, and shippers often demand them. Husch Blackwell's warning is that the same terms can be read as operational control, and the firm advises reviewing contracts for both vetting language and control language.

The Transportation Intermediaries Association asked FMCSA in June for guidance on what brokers can rely on when picking carriers, according to FreightWaves. No guidance had been reported as of this writing.

What it means for carriers

Carriers may see more broker contract language that shifts risk back to them, including indemnity and insurance minimums. Carriers should read tracking and check-in clauses closely, since they now carry legal weight beyond the load.

What to watch

An appeal could take a long time, and the judgment is not final. Watch for any FMCSA response to the TIA request, broker contract revisions, and insurer pricing for contingent auto liability coverage.